1. Field
The disclosed and claimed concept relates generally to handheld electronic devices that have reduced keypads and that employ password protection and, more particularly, to a method of generating and providing a password to such a handheld electronic device from a separate electronic device like a PC.
2. Background Information
Numerous types of handheld electronic devices are known. Examples of such handheld electronic devices include, for instance, personal data assistants (PDAs), handheld computers, two-way pagers, cellular telephones, and the like. Many handheld electronic devices also feature wireless communication capability, although many such handheld electronic devices are stand-alone devices that are functional without communication with other devices.
Such handheld electronic devices are generally intended to be portable, and thus are of a relatively compact configuration in which keys and other input structures often perform multiple functions under certain circumstances or may otherwise have multiple aspects or features assigned thereto. With advances in technology, handheld electronic devices are built to have progressively smaller form factors yet have progressively greater numbers of applications and features resident thereon. As a practical matter, the keys of a keypad can only be reduced to a certain small size before the keys become relatively unusable. In order to enable text entry, however, a keypad must be capable of entering all twenty-six letters of the Roman alphabet, for instance, as well as appropriate punctuation and other symbols.
One way of providing numerous letters in a small space has been to provide a “reduced keyboard” in which multiple letters, symbols, and/or digits, and the like, are assigned to any given key. For example, a touch-tone telephone includes a reduced keyboard by providing twelve keys, of which ten have digits thereon, and of these ten keys, eight have Roman letters assigned thereto. For instance, one of the keys includes the digit “2” as well as the letters “A”, “B”, and “C”. Since a single actuation of such a key potentially could be intended by the user to refer to any of the letters “A”, “B”, and “C”, and potentially could also be intended to refer to the digit “2”, the input (by actuation of the key) generally is an ambiguous input and is in need of some type of disambiguation in order to be useful for text entry purposes. Other known reduced keyboards have included other arrangements of keys, letters, symbols, digits, and the like. One example of a reduced keyboard is the keypad 24 forming a part of the handheld electronic device 4 shown in FIG. 1. Keypad 24 is what is known as a reduced QWERTY keyboard.
In order to enable a user to make use of the multiple letters, digits, and the like on any given key in an ambiguous keyboard, numerous keystroke interpretation systems have been provided. For instance, a “multi-tap” system allows a user to substantially unambiguously specify a particular character on a key by pressing the same key a number of times equivalent to the position of the desired character on the key. For example, on the aforementioned telephone key that includes the characters “ABC2”, if the user desires to specify the letter “C”, the user will press the key three times. Similarly, on the aforementioned keypad 24, if the user desires to specify the letter “C”, the user will press the key that includes the characters “CV7” once, and if the user desires to specify the letter “I”, the user will press the key that includes the characters “UI3” two times.
Another exemplary keystroke interpretation system would include key chording, of which various types exist. For instance, a particular character can be entered by pressing two keys in succession or by pressing and holding a first key while pressing a second key. Still another exemplary keystroke interpretation system would be a “press-and-hold/press-and-release” interpretation function in which a given key provides a first result if the key is pressed and immediately released, and provides a second result if the key is pressed and held for a short period of time.
Another keystroke interpretation system that has been employed is a software-based text disambiguation function. In such a system, a user typically presses keys to which one or more characters have been assigned, generally pressing each key one time for each desired letter, and the disambiguation software attempts to predict the intended input. Numerous such systems have been proposed. One example of such a system is disclosed in commonly owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/931,281, entitled “Handheld Electronic Device With Text Disambiguation,” the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
As will be appreciated, certain of the keystroke interpretation systems described above (“multi-tap,” chording, and “press-and-hold / press-and-release”) rely on the number of times that a key is pressed, the number of keys that are pressed, and/or how long that a key remains pressed, each of which constitute a non-ambiguous key depression sequence, to determine, with certainty, the intended input. Such systems do not attempt to predict an intended input from an ambiguous input like software-based text disambiguation function systems do. Such keystroke interpretation systems shall be referred to herein as “non-predictive keystroke interpretation systems” in order to distinguish them from software-based text disambiguation function keystroke interpretation systems that use software to attempt to predict intended input from an ambiguous input.
Handheld electronic devices that incorporate such a software-based text disambiguation function typically also provide a non-predictive key-based keystroke interpretation system such as the “multi-tap” system described above for use when it is not practical to use the software-based text disambiguation function. In many cases, the use of a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system such as the “multi-tap” system is the default input mode, and the software-based text disambiguation function must be selectively toggled on by the user when desired. In other cases, the software-based text disambiguation function may be automatically toggled off by the handheld electronic device in appropriate circumstances.
The problem, however, is that users of handheld electronic devices that employ a software-based text disambiguation function become accustomed to typing in that mode, wherein a key that includes the character the user wants need only be pressed a single time (even though the key has multiple characters on it). Such users often forget that, in certain situations, the software-based text disambiguation functionality is not utilized by the handheld electronic device and that in those situations they need to enter information in a different mode, such as a “multi-tap” mode or another mode utilizing a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system. Thus, users may at times press keys in a particular order (while thinking text disambiguation functionality is being employed) and expect that a certain string of characters is being input, when in fact, an entirely different string of characters is being input based on a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system employed by the handheld electronic device because, at that moment, that system, and not the text disambiguation system, is active on the handheld electronic device. For example, a user may think they are inputting the word “THE” by consecutively pressing the keys, only once, that include the letters “T-H-E”, since if the text disambiguation system were active, then it is likely that the input string “THE” would result from this sequence of key pressing. However, in actuality, if the text disambiguation system is in fact not active, and instead a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system such as a multi-tap system is active, the input string that will result from consecutively pressing the keys, only once, that include the letters “T-H-E” will be something different than the input string “THE.” For example, in the case of the keypad 24 shown in FIG. 1 in a multi-tap mode, the input string “TGE” will result from that key depression sequence. This is the case because, referring to FIG. 1, in multi-tap mode, a single press of the key including the letter “T” will result in a “T” being input, a single press of the key including the letter “H” will result in a “G” being input, and a single press of the key including the letter “E” will result in an “E” being input. For obvious reasons, this confusion may result in problems with inputting information into such a handheld electronic device.
The problem described above is particularly acute when the establishment and input of passwords is required. As is known, most handheld electronic devices include security measures designed to ensure that only an authorized user of the handheld electronic device is able to use the handheld electronic device and access and use the data and applications provided and stored thereon. Typically, such measures are implemented by requiring that a user established password be entered into the handheld electronic device before it may be “unlocked” and used. The handheld electronic device will not move to an unlocked state until it determines that the password entered is valid and therefore accepted. As used herein, the term password refers to a string of any characters that may be input into a handheld electronic device by a user using a keyboard or the like provided as part of the handheld electronic device. In addition, many handheld electronic devices enable a user to synchronize the handheld electronic device with another electronic device, such as a personal computer, in order to synchronize data, such as addresses, calendar appointments, memos, tasks and other personal information management (PIM) data, between the two devices. As is known, this may be accomplished through a wired connection between the two devices or by wireless communications between the two devices. When a handheld electronic device is to be synchronized with another electronic device, a user must typically enter the password associated with the handheld electronic device into the other electronic device using a keyboard provided therewith, which entered password is then transmitted to the handheld electronic device for authentication. This is done to control access to the handheld electronic device to ensure that the handheld electronic device will only synchronize with an authorized electronic device.
A problem may arise, however, when a user of a handheld electronic device having a reduced keyboard as described above establishes a password for the handheld electronic device thinking the handheld electronic device is in a text disambiguation mode utilizing a software-based text disambiguation system, when in fact it is in a different input mode utilizing a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system such as a multi-tap system (most devices use a mode utilizing a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system when setting and inputting passwords). For example, a user may think they are setting their password to the string “THE” by consecutively pressing the keys, only once, that include the letters “T-H-E” during a password setting process (because they mistakenly think the handheld electronic device is in a text disambiguation mode), when in fact, as discussed above, that key pressing sequence will be interpreted as and the password will be set to something else, for example the string “TGE” as described above. The user will be able to subsequently access the handheld electronic device by consecutively pressing the keys on the handheld electronic device that include the letters “T-H-E” when a password is required. In this case, the user again mistakenly thinks they are entering the password “THE” that they set before, when in fact they are again entering “TGE.” This does not present a problem for the user because, notwithstanding this mistake, they are still able to access the handheld electronic device. The problem arises, however, when the user tries to synchronize the handheld electronic device with another electronic device, such as a PC, that includes, for example, a standard, non-reduced keyboard. In that situation, the user will be prompted to enter the correct password into the other electronic device, and will press the keys that include the letters “T-H-E,” thinking they are properly entering their previously established password. The handheld electronic device, however, will require the string “TGE” in order to permit access, as that was the string actually entered during the password establishment process. The user, having entered the string “THE,” will be denied access. A similar problem may arise when trying to pair handheld electronic device 4 with another electronic device, such as a PC, that includes a standard, non-reduced keyboard in order to establish a connection, for example using the Bluetooth™ protocol, between the two. As is known in the art, the term “pairing” means that the two devices have exchanged a password or the like that has been entered into each in order to establish a trusted connection.
Thus, a method is needed for handheld electronic devices having reduced keyboards and a non-predictive keystroke interpretation system that simplifies the inputting of passwords from another separate electronic device seeking access to the handheld electronic device.
Similar numerals refer to similar parts throughout the specification.